Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Thu, 24 Aug 2023 08:02:51 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce __next_thread(), change next_thread() |
| |
On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 07:32, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote: > > After document-while_each_thread-change-first_tid-to-use-for_each_thread.patch > in mm tree + this series
Looking at your patch 2/2, I started looking at users ("Maybe we *want* NULL for the end case, and make next_thread() and __next_thread be the same?").
One of the main users is while_each_thread(), which certainly wants that NULL case, both for an easier loop condition, but also because the only user that uses the 't' pointer after the loop is fs/proc/base.c, which wants it to be NULL.
And kernel/bpf/task_iter.c seems to *expect* NULL at the end?
End result: if you're changing next_thread() anyway, please just change it to be a completely new thing that returns NULL at the end, which is what everybody really seems to want, and don't add a new __next_thread() helper. Ok?
Linus
| |